and many more benefits!

Find us on Facebook

GMAT Club Timer Informer

Hi GMATClubber!

Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:

Between 1984 and 1989, occupancy rates in college [#permalink]
07 Jan 2013, 19:59

2

This post receivedKUDOS

1

This post wasBOOKMARKED

00:00

A

B

C

D

E

Difficulty:

55% (hard)

Question Stats:

56%(02:20) correct
44%(01:44) wrong based on 271 sessions

Between 1984 and 1989, occupancy rates in college dormitories averaged 91 percent of capacity, while admission rates remained constant at an average of 200 students per 1,000 rooms per year. Between 1989 and 1994, however, occupancy rates rose to an average of 98 percent of capacity, while student admission rates declined to 150 per 1,000 rooms per year.

If the information above is true, it would most clearly support which of the following statements?(A) The average length of time that students remained in campus housing increased between 1989 and 1994. (B) The proportion of students living in campus housing was greater in 1994 than in 1989. (C) Student admission rates tend to decline whenever campus-housing occupancy rates rise. (D) Campus dormitories built prior to 1989 generally had fewer rooms than did campus dormitories built after 1989. (E) The more rooms campus housing has, the higher its occupancy rate is likely to be.

The stimulus offers facts about the occupancy rates in college dormitories for two time periods – 1984-1989 and 1989-1994. The more recent time period had an increase in occupancy rates at the same time fewer students were admitted. Here, a strong connection between the two statements allows us to predict that the increase in occupancy rates during 1989-1994 must be caused by more current students remaining in the dormitories. The increase in occupancy rates cannot be caused by more new students because there were fewer students admitted.

Choice (A) states that the average length of time that students remained in campus housing increased between 1989 and 1994. This matches with above explanation and is the correct answer.

Choice (B) says that the proportion of students living in campus housing was greater in 1994 than in 1989. This is an irrelevant comparison; we are concerned with the percentage of rooms that are occupied, not the percentage of students who live in dormitories.

Choice (C) mentions that student admission rates tend to decline whenever campus-housing occupancy rates rise. This is outside of the scope; we can’t infer anything about how admission and occupancy rates typically behave from this specific example.

Choice (D) indicates that campus dormitories built prior to 1989 generally had fewer rooms than did campus dormitories built after 1989. This makes an irrelevant comparison – the number of rooms is not an issue, as the stimulus gives us the information as a “"per 1,000”" rate.

Choice (E) suggests that the more rooms campus housing has, the higher its occupancy rate is likely to be. This doesn't follow from the stimulus – again, the rate of occupancy makes the actual number of rooms irrelevant. _________________

addmission rate - number of students admitted to the dormitory/1000 roomsoccupancy rate is the percentage of rooms that remain occupied in a particular time period.even though number of students admitted decreased, their stay at the dormitory increased hence the occupancy rate increased.Answer - A

addmission rate - number of students admitted to the dormitory/1000 roomsoccupancy rate is the percentage of rooms that remain occupied in a particular time period.even though number of students admitted decreased, their stay at the dormitory increased hence the occupancy rate increased.Answer - A

I do not agree: the number of admitted students does not necessarely decrease, only the rate does. Very confusing question...

addmission rate - number of students admitted to the dormitory/1000 roomsoccupancy rate is the percentage of rooms that remain occupied in a particular time period.even though number of students admitted decreased, their stay at the dormitory increased hence the occupancy rate increased.Answer - A

I do not agree: the number of admitted students does not necessarely decrease, only the rate does. Very confusing question...

A ,Correct, the number of new students decrease, so the average stay of the other students must increase to have a higher occupancy rate.B, Incorrect as we are given the average 98 percent, we cannot be sure that the number of students were more in 1994 or 1989. We cannot conclude this from the information provided.Rest all are way off. _________________

addmission rate - number of students admitted to the dormitory/1000 roomsoccupancy rate is the percentage of rooms that remain occupied in a particular time period.even though number of students admitted decreased, their stay at the dormitory increased hence the occupancy rate increased.Answer - A

I do not agree: the number of admitted students does not necessarely decrease, only the rate does. Very confusing question...

Between 1984 and 1989, occupancy rates in college dormitories averaged 91 percent of capacity, while admission rates remained constant at an average of 200 students per 1,000 rooms per year. Between 1989 and 1994, however, occupancy rates rose to an average of 98 percent of capacity, while student admission rates declined to 150 per 1,000 rooms per year.

If the information above is true, it would most clearly support which of the following statements?(A) The average length of time that students remained in campus housing increased between 1989 and 1994. (B) The proportion of students living in campus housing was greater in 1994 than in 1989. (C) Student admission rates tend to decline whenever campus-housing occupancy rates rise. (D) Campus dormitories built prior to 1989 generally had fewer rooms than did campus dormitories built after 1989. (E) The more rooms campus housing has, the higher its occupancy rate is likely to be.

Good one ;Passage- said That OR-91 when AR-Constant; OR-98 when AR- Decresed.

(A) The average length of time that students remained in campus housing increased between 1989 and 1994. - Correctly defies the ; if the average time the student spending in campus increases then the rooms are likely to occupied at single point of tie hence the occupancy rate will go up, irrespective of the Admission rate.

(B) The proportion of students living in campus housing was greater in 1994 than in 1989.- Now here the word proportion of students is used which mean the ratio of no. of students; i guess OR - defined by no. of rooms occupied /total no. of rooms, not by total no. of students. So this is also not true.

(C) Student admission rates tend to decline whenever campus-housing occupancy rates rise. - So this fact already mentioned in the passage, need not to repeat, this is a fact.

(D) Campus dormitories built prior to 1989 generally had fewer rooms than did campus dormitories built after 1989- May be the case but increased rooms does not correlate with increased occupancy and decreased AR.

(E) The more rooms campus housing has, the higher its occupancy rate is likely to be. - passage discusses the relation v\between OR and AR not with no. of rooms.

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.

The greater proportion of old students to new students in 1994 would result in increased average stay period of the students in 1994.

The same logic for B

In 1989: No.of rooms =1000, New students = 200, Rooms occupied= 910, students live not in campus: 90 In 1994: No.of rooms = 2000, New students = 300, Rooms occupied= 1960, students live not in campus: 40The greater proportion of students living in campus to students living not in campus in 1994 would result in increased number of students live in campus

====

If we can infer that student start living in campus more time why we can't infer that they stop living outside the campus and as a result occupancy rate increase?